Question 4: Candidate A favors the destruction of Federal files with names of law-abiding citizens once they are approved to legally buy a firearm. Candidate B favors a Federal gun-registration system to retain Federal files with the names of law-abiding citizens once they are approved to legally buy a firearm.

Hmmm, how about "None of the above?" Both options are unacceptable.

Question 8: Candidate A supports an instant background check before people could buy guns at gun shows. Candidate B supports a background check with a delay of several days - a delay that would severely restrict commerce at gun shows.

AGAIN, both UNACCEPTABLE.

Question 9: Candidate A supports an extension of the assault weapons rifle ban that was originally included in President Clinton's 1994 crime bill. Candidate B supports and extension of the assault weapons ban but also wants to expand the list of guns covered under the act.

Complete and utter %$&*. Again both are unacceptable.

Question 10: Candidate A is supported by pro-gun and pro-hunting organizations such as the National Rifle Association and the Safari Club. Candidate B is supported by anti-gun and anti-hunting organizations such as the Humane Society and the Fund for Animals.

Correct me if I am wrong but I didn't think the NRA had declared for a candidate yet?

The two candidates aren't in a race to win the presidency, they are in a race to see who can LOSE first. Kerry is just evil while Bush is misguided and sliding away from his principles in a strange effort to win democratic votes (and of course by stepping away from his principles he is losing the conservatives). I think any comparisen between Bush and Reagan is just completely unfounded (I've heard alot of people comparing the two since Reagan died), Reagan stuck to his guns and his principles. Bush jr is going the same route as Bush sr.

7.62FullMetalJacket

June 11, 2004, 04:41 PM

Out of 14 questions, 14 of your answers support George W Bush's views and 0 of your answers support John Kerry's views.
Based on the questions you answered, we have determined that your views on gun control and second amendment rights issues most align with presidential candidate: W

Again, I did not agree with all the questions. I made the best choice out of the dilemma.

Antlurz

June 11, 2004, 04:51 PM

Evil_Ed wrote:Reagan stuck to his guns and his principles.
Unfortunately, RR got soft around the edges when Sarah Brady started whining and pulling his pants leg.

I look at Ron Reagan as an American Hero, but his caving into Sarah Brady will forever leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Ron

Lone_Gunman

June 11, 2004, 08:49 PM

Candidate A wants to crap on your left shoe.

Candidate B wants to crap on both of your shoes.

-----

Which candidate best represents your preference?

Kernel

June 12, 2004, 12:25 AM

I made the best choice out of the dilemma.

..... which is how our democracy has worked for over 200 years. -- Kernel

MrGunRights

June 12, 2004, 04:05 AM

I saw this thing "advertised" on nranews.com a while back and it showed me exactly what the Republicans and Democrats have done in changing the debate. It's no longer a question of gun rights vs. gun control. It is a question of restrictions vs. just a few less restrictions. This perfectly demonstrated how choosing one of the two is just picking your poison. This quiz serves as a cold slap in the face in showing us just how compromised liberty has become.

MrGunRights

June 12, 2004, 04:05 AM

I saw this thing "advertised" on nranews.com a while back and it showed me exactly what the Republicans and Democrats have done in changing the debate. It's no longer a question of gun rights vs. gun control. It is a question of restrictions vs. just a few less restrictions. This perfectly demonstrated how choosing one of the two is just picking your poison. This quiz serves as a cold slap in the face in showing us just how compromised liberty has become.

antsi

June 12, 2004, 07:26 PM

---------quote(s)---------------------
This perfectly demonstrated how choosing one of the two is just picking your poison.
-----------------------------------------
AGAIN, both UNACCEPTABLE.
-----------------------------------------
Candidate A wants to crap on your left shoe.

Candidate B wants to crap on both of your shoes.
-----------------------------------------

I hear this kind of talk a lot. "No compromise," and all that.

Yes, ideally, I would like to elect the "every citizen gets an M-1 Abrams tank of their own" candidate. But, I'll let you in on a little secret: that guy isn't going to win.

Most political battles are to win the middle of the road. The guy who paints his opponent as an extremist and makes it stick is the one who is going to win. And the most effective strategy to make big changes is incrementalism... slowly sneaking your way towards your ultimate goal.

The other side faces the same choices. That's why Kerry pays lip service to "respecting the second ammendment," and "supporting the rights of hunters." The radical gun-ban crowd doesn't agree with those statements, but they are smart enough to know that Kerry is their best most realistic shot at moving policy in the direction they want it to go. They know they can't get everything they want this year, but they are patient and clever and working towards their ultimate goal of gun ban and confiscation... eventually.

If all the anti-gun voters would just adopt a no-compromise position, and say they're not voting for any candidate unless he favors immediate and total gun ban and confiscation, including disarming the military and replacing their firearms with pepper spray, then we gun owners would have it made. They wouldn't be voting for Kerry or anyone else electable, and thus they'd be taking themselves out of the political contest and leaving the field to us.

Obviously, the anti-gun crowd isn't stupid enough to go that way.

I hope the pro-gun crowd isn't.

ReadyontheRight

June 13, 2004, 07:52 PM

Antsi -- Well said.

Lone_Gunman

June 13, 2004, 08:02 PM

Antsi, the middle of the road and incrementalism are responsible for all of the anti gun legislation we have had in the last 40 years.

By your reasoning, do you consider the AWB a victory for our side because all they banned was assault weapons?

7.62FullMetalJacket

June 13, 2004, 10:33 PM

The President

runs the federal government, including BATFE
appoints federal judges and SC justices (Kennedy? Schumer?)
can make executive orders (sporting purposes?)
appoints the Attorney General (Hillary? Feinswine?)
The excutive also interprets law and implements regulations (68 GCA is full of ambiguity)

Yeah, Kerry can't hurt RKBA :rolleyes:

antsi

June 13, 2004, 10:36 PM

-------quote-----------
Antsi, the middle of the road and incrementalism are responsible for all of the anti gun legislation we have had in the last 40 years.
--------------------------

Yes, the other side (anti's) are using an incremental strategy and it's working wonderfully well for them. It is an effective strategy. They have been whittling away at our rights for years. It is going to take some time to win them back.

-------quote------------
By your reasoning, do you consider the AWB a victory for our side because all they banned was assault weapons?
--------------------------

No, quite the opposite. The AWB was a great tactical victory for the anti's. It has harmed the pro-RKBA agenda immensely.

However, if there is a "no compromise" wing of the anti-gun lobby, they probably do not see the AWB as a victory, because it didn't outright ban all guns all in one fell swoop. But the patient, tactical, intelligent anti's realize that the AWB was a win for them, and one to build on. They're already planning the next, incremental expansion of the AWB.

And if gun owners do not support Bush and the Republicans, that's what they're going to get: an expanded AWB. By staying home, holding out for a radical "no compromise" gun rights candidate/party, you are going to put Kerry and the Democrats in power and we will have an expanded AWB in place by this time next year.

Look, I have the same goals as the "no compromise" folks and you, Lone Gunman. The kind of laws you want are the same kind of laws I want.

The difference is not our goals, but our approach to them. You are an idealist: you want 100% of what you want and you want it right now. What you do not seem to realize is that that option isn't on the table. If it was on the table, I'd support it too.

I am a pragmatist. If a limited tactical victory is all we can get right now, I will take it because the only other option is a major defeat.

7.62FullMetalJacket

June 13, 2004, 10:42 PM

Well said, antsi.

Lone_Gunman

June 13, 2004, 11:23 PM

Antsi,

I think we are going to get a return of the AWB no matter who wins the next election, so I think we are nitpicking something that doesn't matter.

If a new AWB gets through Congress, Bush and Kerry would both sign it.

I really don't think it will make a big difference which of them is in office with respect to RKBA.

La Pistoletta

June 14, 2004, 09:32 AM

12 Bush, 2 Kerry.

Least bad choice on most questions.

Sleeping Dog

June 14, 2004, 06:04 PM

Candidate A wants to crap on your left shoe.
Candidate B wants to crap on both your shoes.
Which one represents my best interest?

Put your best foot forward, and vote for A. No question.

cropcirclewalker

June 14, 2004, 08:42 PM

Candidate A wants to crap on your left shoe.
Candidate B wants to crap on both your shoes.
Which one represents my best interest?
Put your best foot forward, and vote for A. No question. When I see this sort of thing, I wonder how long it will be before they are telling us to vote republican so that we can keep our rimfire weapons.

It strikes me that like 2/3rds of the posters on this forum are cowardly. They say they are being strategic or tactical.

Yeah.

Let our children and grandchildren do the reformation.

Well, heres what I think. Youse guys don't HAVE a best foot.

my 2 cents

7.62FullMetalJacket

June 14, 2004, 09:06 PM

Ballot box is different than a cartridge box.

Utilizing the ballot box often means making choices, mostly unpleasant. They are, after all, politicians.

If you are ready for the cartridge box, then you can be "principled."

Gordon Fink

June 14, 2004, 09:17 PM

If remaining principled means that only the cartridge box is left to us …

~G. Fink :(

Antlurz

June 14, 2004, 10:20 PM

cropcirclewalker has a good point. I wonder how many here would really and truly lay down their life in defense of the 2nd Amendment?

Ron

CrudeGT

June 15, 2004, 01:26 AM

Thank you for taking the Bush Kerry Gun Test. You're Almost Done!

Out of 14 questions, 14 of your answers support George W Bush's views and 0 of your answers support John Kerry's views.
Based on the questions you answered, we have determined that your views on gun control and second amendment rights issues most align with presidential candidate:

George W. Bush

It is kind of like picking the least of two evils... But when we're playing by their rules, there's not much other choice. It's kind of hard to fight for your RKBS when you're dead or in federal prison. We have to make baby steps to get what we want, otherwise we come off as a another branch-davidian Waco incident.